Andreas Oberritter wrote:
> Steven Toth wrote:
>> Markus Rechberger wrote:
>>> Great move Steven! Can we move the TDA10048 code over, maybe adding
>>> a note that it's dual licensed would be nice?
>> In principle yes.
>>>> I'd like to see an example of dual license just to make sure it has no
>> nasty side effects.
>>>> Can you point me at one of your dual-license drivers so I can review the
>> wording?
>> AFAIK the biggest problem with dual licensing is that you cannot merge
> patches from Linus' tree, because they are not dual licensed (unless, of
> course, you'll get the permission from the contributors).
That's also been my understanding in the past.
As the copyright owner I'm legally entitled to generate a separate
license for the code I originally merged into Linus's tree, though -
correct? (Perhaps not any updates that were subsequently made to that
code by the community).
I guess this is would be seen legally as two pieces of code with two
distinct licenses, not a dual license... or maybe I'm splitting hairs.
Regardless, it will be an interest exercise to review the proposed dual
license, even if nothing good can come from it.
- Steve